ISSN 2029-7564 (online)
SOCIALINĖS TECHNOLOGIJOS
SOCIAL TECHNOLOGIES
2011, 1(2), p. 255–266
THE USAGE OF INFORMAL COMPUTER BASED
COMMUNICATION IN THE CONTEXT OF
ORGANIZATION’S TECHNOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Agota Giedrė Raišienė
Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania, [email protected]
Steponas Jonušauskas
Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania, [email protected]
Abstract
Purpose of the article is theoretically and practically analyze the features of
informal computer based communication in the context of organization’s technological
resources.
Methodology—meta analysis, survey and descriptive analysis.
Findings. According to scientists, the functions of informal communication
cover sharing of work related information, coordination of team activities, spread
of organizational culture and feeling of interdependence and affinity. Also, informal
communication widens the individuals’ recognition of reality, creates general context of
environment between talkers, and strengthens interpersonal attraction. For these reasons,
informal communication is desirable and even necessary in organizations because
it helps to ensure efficient functioning of the enterprise. However, communicating
through electronic channels suppresses informal connections or addresses them to
the outside of the organization. So, electronic communication is not beneficial for
Socialinės technologijos/Social Technologies
 Mykolo Romerio universitetas, 2011
 Mykolas Romeris University, 2011
ISSN 2029-7564 (online)
https://www.mruni.eu/lt/mokslo_darbai/st/apie_leidini/
https://www.mruni.eu/en/mokslo_darbai/st/apie_leidini/index.php
256
Agota Giedrė Raišienė, Steponas Jonušauskas. The Usage of Informal Computer Based Communication...
developing ties in informal organizational network. The empirical research showed, that
significant part of courts administration staff is prone to use technological resources
of their office for informal communication. Representatives of courts administration
choose friends for computer based communication much more often than colleagues
(72% and 63%respectively). 93%of the research respondents use an additional e-mail
box serviced by commercial providers for non work communication. High intensity of
informal electronic communication with friends and familiars shows that workers of
court administration are used to meet their psycho emotional needs outside the work
place. The survey confirmed conclusion of the theoretical analysis: computer based
communication is not beneficial for developing informal contacts between workers. In
order for the informal communication could carry out its functions and technological
recourses of organization would be used effectively, staff should be motivated to
communicate directly face to face.
Research limitations—It can be reasonably suspected, that the real measure
of informal communication with outside recipients is even higher, than the data of
the research shows. In could be stipulated by the lack of analysis of other electronic
communication mediums (e.g. video calls, social networks, internet forums, etc.).
Practical implications. The results of the research help to form a wider
comprehension about features of organizational communication. Authors of the research
state that if managers would pay more attention to the practice of employees’ informal
and computer based communication, they would improve the usage of information
technology resources.
Originality/Value—Informal electronic communication in Lithuania’s orga­
nizations had not been researched yet. The chosen subject is definitely new. On the other
hand, deep penetration of computer-based communication in employees’ daily routine
shows the relevancy of the topic.
Keywords: informal communication, computer based communication, technological
resources, effective communication.
Research type: viewpoint and research paper.
The quality of organization’s communication directly related to the efficiency of
organization’s business (Guo, Sanchez, 2005). Researchers and leaders of organizations
concentrate on the formal communication. This practice is justified and understandable,
because the quality of the formal communication determine the efficiency of labor
(Litterst, Eyo, 1982), an amount of coordination expenses (Sine et al., 2006), a success
of conflict regulating, a spread of rumors (Difonzo, Bordia, 2000) and so on.
However, it should be highlighted, that an informal communication also influences
the efficiency and the quality of work (Anderson, Narus, 1984; Johnson et al., 1994).
Informal communication helps to solve problems associated with teamwork, bridges
different attitudes to organization’s goals, joints workers’ assignments, values as well
as developing tolerance for different opinions (Ogaard et al., 2008; Hargie et al., 2003).
Social Technologies. 2011, 1(2): 255–266.
In the era of globalization, organizations overstep territories of the native country.
Their members gather into virtual teams. Face to face communication becomes optional
while trying to realize their goals. Due to economical reasons, organizations promote
work in the environment of mobile information technologies. Speaking about formal
electronic communication, researches show different results. In an opinion of some
scientists, computer based communication leads to lower outcomes of teams than in
the way of dealing directly (Carmel, 1999; Olson ir Olson, 2000; Begale et al., 2002).
The other researches value computer based communication as a successful in terms of
increasing of work efficiency (Whittaker, Bradner, 2000; Lau etc., 2001). Meanwhile,
there is a consensus in opinion about informal electronic communication. Research
show that organization suffers in case of lack of sufficient informal communication and
the problem is the greater the more workers communicate by technological mediums
(Whittaker, 2003; Efimova, Grudin, 2007; Thom-Shantelli et al., 2008; McFedries,
2007; Handel, Herbsleb, 2002). One of the most important notices is that workers use
organization information technologies for informal communication creating theirs
connections outside of organization instead of creating them inside. In that way,
organization resources are used wastefully.
It should be noted that research on informal electronic communication in Lithuania’s
organizations has not been done yet. That is why the chosen subject is definitely new.
On the other hand, deep penetration of computer based communication in workers daily
routines shows the relevancy of the topic.
The goal of the article is to theoretically and practically analyze the features of
informal computer based communication in the context of organization’s technological
resources. The tasks of the article are: 1) to ascertain the influence of informal
communication to the work performance; 2) to discuss the changes of informal
communication in electronic media; 3) to implement the empirical research and to assess
the usage of informal electronic communication in chosen public sector organization in
the context of technological resources.
Research methods: meta-analysis, survey and descriptive analysis.
In the first part of the article, the insights on informal electronic communication
made by abroad authors are reviewed. In the second part, the empiric research made by
the article authors is introduced. The third part submits the discussion and summarized
conclusions.
1. The attitude of abroad researchers towards electronic informal
communication in organizations
Organizational communication can be conditionally divided into task-oriented
and relationship-oriented. Speaking about task-oriented communication, the aspect of
accuracy is the most important. However, when evaluating the communication which is
meant to sustain relations, politeness should be taken into consideration (Kaul, Pandit,
2008). The informal communication adjusts both aspects – oriented to tasks and oriented
to relations.
257
258
Agota Giedrė Raišienė, Steponas Jonušauskas. The Usage of Informal Computer Based Communication...
The functions of informal communication covers sharing work related information,
coordinating team activities, spreading organizational culture and feeling of
interdependence and affinity. Researches show, that informal communication also plays
a big role of enhancing group collaboration and initiating innovations in organization
(Johnson et al., 1994; Nardi, 2005; Kraut et al., 1990). Nevertheless, one of the key
functions of communication is to meet personal needs of individuals (Kaul, Pandit,
2008, p.1).
Informal communication widens the individuals’ recognition of reality. Social
psychologists state that due to the reality’s complexity, people comprehend the
environment by creating less complex schemes of reality. These schemes are referred
both while assessing events and making decisions (Brown, 2006; Kunda, 1999). While
sharing the experiences in informal environment, people learn to forecast the changes
of close environment and foresee the behavior of other individuals. Workers also apply
these notices in work. So it can be stated, that informal communication between workers
is valuable both for their individual development and work efficiency. Knowledge of
human relationship leads to better understanding, more positive outcome of interpersonal
conflicts, ability to cooperate, etc.
It is also important that informal communication creates general context of
environment between talkers (Zhao, Rosson, 2004). That enables people to better
and faster understand each other, communicate without requiring as much efforts as
communicating with people of “other context.” Common ground significantly decreases
the probability that information would be distorted. In example, the common ground
abolishes the communicational barriers determined by specialization. It is important to
say, that a common understanding forms progressively and can not be enforced (McLean,
2005; Siff, Mongeau, 2002). So, informal communication is essential for workers in the
boundaries of enterprise, but it has no direct value from contacts with people outside.
Informal communication strengthens interpersonal attraction. Due to informal
conversation, positive emotions are being felt and that motives to develop interpersonal
relationships, sharing important information, giving mutual assistance and moral support
(Nardi, 2005). In addition, informal connections between colleagues create a sense
of community (Rawlings, 1992; Mayers, 2009). Unfortunately, creating connections
outside the organization, additional value to the organization is not created. It has to be
highlighted, that if an individual feels reliance on outer people (not inner referent group),
the work colleagues are comprehended as strangers, meaning “them,” but not “us.”
That’s why it is hard to expect teamwork, loyalty to the enterprise, concern about joint
results from employees, when there is a lack of informal work groups and connections.
Summarizing, the informal communication is desirable and even necessary in
organizations. It helps to ensure efficient functioning of the enterprise. However, when
communication moves to the electronic medium, workers decline direct speaking. The
communication by technological channels is more like changing remarks, not meaningful
dialogue (Whittaker, 2003).
Understanding the importance of the communication quality, managers have
started to use auxiliary means of interpersonal connection, such as “blogs”, profession
Social Technologies. 2011, 1(2): 255–266.
related forums, social networks, etc. (Efimova, Grudin, 2007; Thom-Shantelli, et al.,
2008). Nevertheless, the modern means of communication have lots of negative sides.
As information technology expert McFedries (2007) notices, mobile technologies
stimulate communication processes, but the information recipients overstep boundaries
of organizations and expand into a much wider area. Workers communicate with their
friends, family members or even strangers who cherish similar hobbies more frequently,
instead of communicating with each other. It is needed to realize, that due to the ability
to communicate through world wide network, the goals of informal communication
were changed. Previously, colleagues were sharing information needed to cope with
assignments, given the support for each other at work. Nowadays much more time is
given to emotional needs that are usually met outside the organization. The informal
communication is still needed to keep good psycho emotional state of the workers, but
it doesn’t perform another important role: it does not bring closer the members of the
collective, does not help to make new collaborative connections or create and share new
ideas. Due to this fact, organization technological resource usage for workers’ informal
communication could be assessed as a negative phenomenon, and a damaging practice
for the enterprise.
It is important to highlight that technologies in of themselves do not motivate the
members of virtual workgroups to communicate informally. That guides the conclusion,
that saving of expenses, which can seem obvious from first sight (e.g. the price of common
work place, expenses for meetings and transport) determine higher final expenses.
The problem of communication simultaneity is another aspect, at which the influence
of technologies for workers’ informal communication is being analyzed in scientific
literature. Not all of the technological channels enable real-time communication. For
example, correspondence through electronic mail is asynchronous. Due to the delay
of receiving answer, the information received may be not comprehended as adequate.
The longer the delay is, the less important the information received seems and the less
are the chances that new ideas would arise between communicants or help would be
given (Handel, Herbsleb, 2002). On the other hand using synchronous mediums of
electronic communication, e.g. web discussions, workers can immediately find answers
to questions related to their work. The informal tone of these communications boosts
interpersonal confidence and increases the probability of further cooperation (Cho et al.,
2005; Cameron, Webster, 2005; Hrastinski, 2007).
The quality of informal communication, as well as formal communication, is
negatively affected by the lack of non-verbal signals when using electronic devices of
communication. When speaking directly, more than 90% of information is received though
a person’s mimics, body posture, speech tempo, intonation etc. (Dumbrava, Koronka,
2009). Personal meetings, direct conversations and interpersonal understanding, formed
at that time is essential for ensuring efficient organizational communication (Anand,
Shachar, 2007).
Speaking about informal communication, one of its negative aspects are gossips,
and undesirable and uncontrolled spread of rumors. Rumors as informal communication
creates social context, enables widening the limits of personal and group influence,
259
260
Agota Giedrė Raišienė, Steponas Jonušauskas. The Usage of Informal Computer Based Communication...
ensures particular social control (Houmafar, Johnson, 2003; Shahaida, Nargundkar,
2006; Fishbach, 2009). Rumors and gossip may perfectly serve while making changes,
motivating workers, etc. (Robbins, Judge, 2007). It should be noted that rumors spread
significantly slower through technologic channels, so in the aspect of rumor prevention,
communicating through electronic mediums can be assessed positively.
Summarizing, it can be stated that informal organizational communication
is important as well as formal. With the help of the informal communication, work
completion could be improved, work related problems could be solved, cooperation
experience could be obtained and various human needs ranging from socialization
and safety to power and self-esteem could be met. However, communicating through
technological channels suppresses informal connections or addresses them to the outside
of the organization. So, electronic communication is not beneficial for developing ties in
informal organizational networks.
2. Traits of employee informal electronic communication in
judicial courts administration
In empirical research, the presumption that informal communication is stronger
with outer target groups than with colleagues when using computer based technologies
(summing up the acts of both formal and informal communication) was examined. The
research was pursued in juridical courts in the area of Vilnius. 43 servants of court
administration took part in the survey. In order to avoid the differences of technological
competence of individuals, respondents with minimal skills in computer education were
selected. The criterion of the selection was ensured by questioning only the people who
were getting ready for ECDL certification. The survey was made using unified question
forms. The questionnaire was given directly to the participants. The received data of the
survey was analyzed using statistical and descriptive analysis. Respondents were asked:
1. How many letters do the respondents usually receive every day, how many did
they get yesterday and today;
2. How many letters do the respondents write ordinarily;
3. Approximately, how much time does it take for the respondents to write answers to their letters per day;
4. How quick do they react to a request for the answer;
5. From what groups do they receive letters;
6. For what groups do they send letters;
7. Do they have extra e-mail systems installed in their computers or do they use
commercial e-mail systems at work;
Analyzing the answers it was found out, that the respondents receive approximately
5 new letters every day. “Yesterday” respondents had approximately received 4 letters,
and when the survey was taken at noon, they had received about 2 letters. If absolute
meaning of the data was evaluated, the difference between “today” and approximate
Social Technologies. 2011, 1(2): 255–266.
number of letters was 60%, and the difference between “yesterday” and the approximate
number of letters was 20%.
The respondents usually write 4 letters everyday. 21% of those who took part in the
survey need about ten minutes to answer all letters. 61% need about thirty minutes, and
12% of the survey participants took up to an hour to answer correspondence. The rest
of the respondents stated, that they usually do not have to write answers to the letters in
general.
47% of the survey participants answer their letters immediately when the e-mail
system announces the new mail. 9% of people try to make it during the closest hour and
33% of those questioned—on the same day.
Speaking about the target groups for e-mail exchange, it was discovered that
respondents receive e-mails everyday or very often from: 1) friends (49% marked this
option), 2) managers (42%), 3) colleagues of one department (30%), 4) colleagues from
other departments (12%), 5) clients (9%). The data is illustrated by the picture No. 1.
Picture 1. The contact groups from which the respondents receive e-mail the most often
26% of the research participants do not receive e-mail from friends at all. Also
23% of respondents never receive letters from managers, 28%—from colleagues of their
department, 56% from colleagues of other departments, and 40%—from clients.
While analyzing the addressees, it was discovered that 12% of the questioned
people write e-mails every day or often to their managers, 35%—to their friends, 14%—
to colleagues of their department, 9%—to the clients.
58% of the respondents do not send letters to their colleagues from other departments,
42%—write them occasionally. 37% of the questioned people do not send e-mails to
their department colleagues, 28% of respondents never send letters to their friends. The
research results are shown in pictures No. 2 and No. 3.
261
262
Agota Giedrė Raišienė, Steponas Jonušauskas. The Usage of Informal Computer Based Communication...
Picture No. 2. The contact groups to which the respondents are sending e-mails most often
Picture No. 3. The target groups to which the respondents do not keep in touch by e-mail at all
Also research shows, that 93% of the survey participants have and use the
commercial e-mail systems in their work computers. 14% of the questioned people use
more than one e-mail box in their work.
3. Discussion and conclusion
By the results of the research, a large part of the staff in courts administration is
prone to use technological resources of their office for informal communication by
Social Technologies. 2011, 1(2): 255–266.
e-mail with recipients outside the organization. The survey participants, though being
unskilled computer users, choose friends for computer based communication much
more often (72% write e-mails to their friends) than with colleagues of their departments
(63%). Almost 60% of the questioned people do not initiate an act of communication
with colleagues from other departments via electronic medium at all. It implies that
intergroup electronic communication is fragmented and formal. On the other hand,
the face to face communication was not examined, so it could not be stated, that the
respondents do not cultivate direct connections of informal communication with their
colleagues. However, high intensity of informal electronic communication with friends
shows that workers of court administration are used to meet their psycho emotional
needs outside the work place. This conclusion is strengthened by the fact that even
93% of the questioned use an additional e-mail box serviced by commercial providers.
It can be reasonably suspected, that the real measure of informal communication with
outside recipients is even higher, than the data of the research shows. The more because
the communication was not analyzed in other electronic mediums (e.g. video calls, say
Skype, social networks like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, various internet forums).
While analyzing the data of the research, it was discovered, that the respondents
spend from 10 to 60 minutes of their work day for electronic communication. Considering
that an average salary is paid for the time spent on communication not related with
work, a conclusion can be made, that represented organizations suffer loss due to this
worker behavior, and the resources of organizational information technologies are used
inefficiently. The situation is cushioned by the fact that the overall number of sent and
received e-mails is not high. On the other hand, respondents state that usually they
receive many more e-mails than in recent days. In the opinion of scientists, the perverted
perception that the mail flow is greater than it is in reality shows, that employees undergo
stress due to the usage of technologies in everyday life work (Jarvenpaa et al., 2005).
In conclusion, it should be highlighted that informal communication, as well as
formal communication is a vital and integral element of every organization. With the
help of informal communication, the accomplishment of job tasks could be improved,
work related problems could be solved, cooperation experience is obtained and various
human needs are met. However, the empirical research confirms the conclusion of abroad
researchers, which asserts that communication through informal channels diverting
informal connections of employees to the outside of organization. So computer based
communication is not beneficial for developing informal contacts between workers. In
order for the informal communication could carry out its functions and technological
recourses would be used effectively, staff should be motivated to communicate directly
face to face.
The results of the research helps to form a wider comprehension about the employees’
communication needs and the features of organizational communication. Employers
and managers should pay more attention to the practice of informal communication, and
improve the usage of information technology resources. In the scientific context, the
authors of the paper invite to perform interdisciplinary investigations on the efficiency
of organizational activity in electronic medium, in order to create a value to the business.
263
264
Agota Giedrė Raišienė, Steponas Jonušauskas. The Usage of Informal Computer Based Communication...
Literature
Anand B. N., Shachar R. (2007) Noisy
Communication. Journal of Quantitative
Marketing and Economics, Vol. 5, p. 211–237.
Anderson J. C., Narus J. A. (1984) A model of
the distributor’s perspective of distributormanufacturer working relationships. Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 48, Iss. 4, p. 62–74.
Begale J., Tang J. C., Smith R. E., Yankelovich N.
(2002) Work rythms: analyzing visualizations
of awareness histories of distributed groups,
CSCW, New Orleans.
Brown C. (2006) Social Psychology, Sage.
Cameron A. F., Webster J. (2005) Unintended
consequences of emerging communication
technologies: Instant massaging in workplace.
Computers in Human Behaviour, Vol. 21,
Iss. 1, p. 85–103.
Carmel E. (1999) Global Software Teams,
Prentice Hall.
Cho H. K., Trier M., Kim E. (2005) The use of
instant massaging in working relationship
development: A case study. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol.
10, Iss. 4.
Difonzo N., Bordia P. (2000). How top PR
professionals handle hearsay: corporate
rumors, their effects, and strategies to
manage them. Public Relation Review,
26(2), 173–190.
Dumbrava G., Koronka A., Cucu I (2009)
Actions speak louder than words: body
language in business communication.
Annals of the University of Petrosani,
Economics, Vol. 9, Iss. 3.
Efimova L., Grudin J. (2007) Crossing
Boundaries: A Case study of emploee
blogging. Proceedings of the HICSS-40. Los
Alamitos: IEEE Press.
Fishbach K., Gloor P. A., Shoder D. (2009)
Analysis of Informal Communication
Networks—A Case Study, Business and
Information System Egineering, Vol. 1,
Apr., p. 140–149.
Guo L. Ch., Sanchez Y. (2005) Workplace
communication. Organizational Behavior
in Helth Care (Borkowski N. Ed.) Jones and
Bartlett publications, p. 77–110.
Handel M., Herbsleb J. D. (2002) What is Chat
Doing in the Workplace? CSCW, New
Orleans.
Hargie O., Dickson D., Nelson S. (2003).
Working together in a divided society. A
study of intergroup communication in the
Northern Ireland workplace. Journal of
Business and Technical Communication,
Vol. 17, Iss. 3, p. 285–318.
Houmanfar
R.,
Johnson
R.
(2003)
Organizational implications. Journal of
Organizational Behaviour Management,
Vol. 23, Iss. 2, p. 117–138.
Hrastinski S. (2007) IM support of informal
synchronous e-collaboration. In: Kock (ed.)
Encyclopedia of e-collaboration, p. 349–
354, Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Jarvenpaa S. L., Lang K. R., Tuunainen V.
K. (2005) Friend or Foe. Ambivalent
Relationship between Technology and Its
Users’. In: Sorensen C. et al. (eds.) Designing
Ubiquitous Information Environments:
Socio-Technical Issues and Challenges,
New York, Springer, p. 29–42.
Johnson J. D., Donohue W. A., Atkin C. K.,
Johnson S. (1994) Differencies between
formal and informal communication channels,
Journal of business communication.
Kaul A., Pandit A. (2008) Playing the Game of
Communication: Enhancing Skills through
a Reading of Literature. Journal of Vikalpa,
Vol. 33, Iss. 2, p. 1–13.
Kraut R. A., Fish R. S., Root R. W., Chalfonte
B. L. (1990) Informal Communications
in Organizations: Form, Function and
Technology, In: Oskamp S., Spacapan S
(eds.) Human reactions to technology:
Claremont symposium on applied social
psychology, CA: Sage Publications.
Kunda Z. (1999) Social Cognition: Making
Sense of People, The MIT Press.
265
Social Technologies. 2011, 1(2): 255–266.
Lau T., Wong Y. H., Chan K. F., Low M.
(2001) Information Technology and the
Work Environment – Does IT change the
way people interact at work? The Journal of
Human Systems Management, Vol. 20, Iss.
3, p. 267–279.
Litterst J. K., Eyo B. (1982). Gauging the
Effectiveness of formal communication
programs: a search for the communicationproductivity link. Journal of Business
Communication, Vol. 19, Iss. 2, p. 15–26.
Mayers D. G. (2009) Social psychology, 10 edn.,
McGraw-Hill.
McFedries, P. (2007) Technically Speaking: All
ATwitter. IEEE Spectrum, Vol. 44, Iss. 10,
p. 84.
McLean S. (2005) The Basis of Interpersonal
Communication, Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Nardi B. A. (2005) Beyond bendwidth:
Dimentions of connection in interpersonal
communication, Journal of Computer
Supported Cooperation Work, Vol. 14, p.
91–130, Springer.
Ogaard T., Marnburg E., Larsen S. (2008).
Perception of organizational structure in
the hospitality industry: Consequences for
commitment, job satisfaction and perceived
performance. Tourism management, Vol. 29,
Iss. 4, p. 661–671.
Olson G. M., Olson J. S. (2000) Distance
Matters. Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 5,
Iss. 2-3, p. 139–179.
Rawlings W. K. (1992) Friendship matters:
Communication, dialectics, and the life
course, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
Robbins S. P., Judge . A. (2007) Organizational
Behavior, Pearson, Prentice Hall.
Shahaida P., Nargundkar R. (2006) Training
Managers for „between you and me“
experiences. The Journal of Business
Perspective, Vol. 1o, Iss. 2, p. 21–27.
Siff J. B., Mongeau P. A. (2002) Persuasive
Communication, The Guilford Press.
Sine W. D., Mitsuhashi H., Kirsch D. A.
(2006). Revisiting Burns and Stalker: formal
structure and new venture performance in
emerging economic sectors. Academy of
Management Journal, Vol. 49, Iss. 1, p. 121–
132.
Thom-Shantelli J., Muller J. M., Millen D. R.
(2008) Social Tagging Roles: Publishers,
Evangelists, Leaders, ACM, p. 1041–1044.
Whittaker S. (2003) Theories and methods in
mediated communication. In: Graesser A.
et al. (eds). The Handbook of Discourse
Process, Mahwah, NJ.
Whittaker S., Bradner E. (2000) Interaction and
Outeraction: Instant Masassaging in Action.
Journal of ACM, Vol. 2/6, p. 79–88.
Zhao D., Rosson M. B. (2004) How and Why
People Twitter: The role that micro-bloggin
plays in informal communication at work,
Journal of ACM, Vol. 1–2.
NEFORMALI ELEKTRONINĖ KOMUNIKACIJA ORGANIZACIJŲ
TECHNOLOGINIŲ IŠTEKLIŲ KONTEKSTE
Agota Giedrė Raišienė
Mykolo Romerio universitetas, Lietuva, [email protected]
Steponas Jonušauskas
Mykolo Romerio universitetas, Lietuva, [email protected]
Santrauka. Straipsnio tikslas – teoriškai ir praktiškai panagrinėti bei technologinių
išteklių kontekste įvertinti neformalios elektroninės komunikacijos reikšmę organizacijoms.
Straipsnio išvados suformuluotos remiantis atliktos metaanalizės bei empirinio tyrimo rezul-
266
Agota Giedrė Raišienė, Steponas Jonušauskas. The Usage of Informal Computer Based Communication...
tatais. Besigilinančių į elektroninės organizacinės komunikacijos klausimus užsienio tyrėjų
darbų analizė parodė, jog neformali komunikacija yra ne mažiau reikšminga nei formali,
siekiant darbuotojų ir organizacijos veiklos efektyvumo. Neformalia komunikacija darbuo­
tojai plečia gyvenimišką patirtį, kuria vėliau remiasi taip pat ir darbe, dalijasi darbine
informacija, teikia vieni kitiems paramą, įveikiant kilusias darbo problemas, tenkina asme­
ninius psichoemocinius poreikius, pvz., bendravimo, pripažinimo, valdžios ir pan. Vertinant
iš organizacijos perspektyvos pažymėtina, kad tinkamai valdoma neformali komunikacija
palengvina komandų veiklos koordinavimą, organizacijos kultūros sklaidą, sumažina pasi­
priešinimą naujovėms, taip pat atlieka tam tikrą individualios bei grupinės elgsenos kontrolės
funkciją. Vis dėlto elektroniniai kanalai silpnina neformalius ryšius, o dar dažniau – per­
kelia juos už organizacijos ribų. Todėl elektroninė komunikacija nėra priemonė, leidžianti
kurti ir palaikyti neformalius tinklus tarp darbuotojų.
Empirinis tyrimas, atliktas tiesiogiai apklausiant Vilniaus miesto ir rajono teismų admi­
nistracijos darbuotojus, parodė, kad tarnautojai aktyviai naudojasi organizacijos technologi­
niais ištekliais neformalios komunikacijos tikslais. Apklausai tikslingai buvo pasirinkti paly­
ginti menko kompiuterinio raštingumo asmenys (dar tik besirengiantys ECDL testavimui),
tačiau elektroniniais laiškais su draugais jie bendravo gana intensyviai: 72 proc. apklaustųjų
teigė, jog su draugais jie susirašinėja kasdien arba dažnai. Be to, 93 proc. tyrimo dalyvių
pažymėjo savo darbo kompiuteryje turį papildomą – komercinę – pašto dėžutę, o 14 proc.
respondentų – net daugiau nei vieną. Plataus masto neformalus elektroninis bendravimas su
draugais ir pažįstamais rodo, jog teismų administracijos darbuotojai savo psichoemocinius
poreikius linkę tenkinti už darbovietės ribų. Tad empirinio tyrimo rezultatai patvirtino
teorinės analizės išvadą, jog bendravimas kompiuteriu nėra vertingas plėtojant neformalius
tarpusavio ryšius tarp organizacijos darbuotojų. Straipsnio autorių nuomone, neformalios
komunikacijos už organizacijos ribų mastas būtų reikšmingai didesnis, jei būtų įvertinta ne
tik elektroninio pašto vartojimo praktika, bet ir kiti elektroninio komunikavimo kanalai:
socialiniai tinklai, videoskambučiai, realaus laiko pokalbių svetainės, interneto forumai ir
pan. Prielaidai patikrinti reikalinga atlikti tolesnius neformalios darbuotojų elektroninės
komunikacijos tyrimus.
Apibendrinant pažymėtina, jog norint, kad neformali komunikacija atliktų savo funk­
cijas organizacijose, o technologiniai ištekliai būtų naudojami efektyviai, vadovai turėtų dar­
buotojus skatinti neformaliai bendrauti tiesiogiai.
Raktažodžiai: neformali komunikacija, elektroninė komunikacija, technologiniai iš­
tek­liai, komunikacijos efektyvumas.